quote:He demonstrated a lot of courage following his heart despite the consequences it would have on his career. Washington needs more of these type of people.

Washington is chock-a-bock full of these types of people...on both sides of the aisle. There is no courage in having an affair, it takes courage to not cheat on your spouse like you promised. If he had any courage he would have followed his heart when he wanted out of his marriage BEFORE taking on another lover. He didn't have the courage that would take, and he didn't have the courage to be honest about what he was doing BEFORE he was caught. Hell, using your definition of courage Bill Clinton demonstrated an equal amount of courage when he followed his heart when it said it wanted a blow job. There is nothing courageous about getting some outside of your marriage.....it is pretty common. The courageous thing to do is to end your marriage when it isn't working and man up and pay the penalty for making that mistake and getting on with life. I don't have any problem with the people of SC electing Sanford, it actually shows a lot of maturation on their part considering the reaction of many in that state over the Lewinsky thing.....but claiming that Sanford is courageous is simply not true...he is weak and scared like most philanderers and only came forward after he was caught red handed......

re: Mark Sanford wins House seat in S. Carolina(Posted by Zach on 5/8/13 at 10:11 am to pistolpete23)

A guy from SC called Rush five days ago and predicted that Sanford would win because the DNC was pouring millions into negative ads. He said that people in South Carolina viewed it as 'piling on' and unfair. Apparently the strategy backfired.

quote:Nice to see conservatives stand up for moral values and all that jazz.

quote:Yeesh. The family values party, indeed.

quote:So the Family Values Party elects an adulterer?

quote:Of course, one could argue that Huma, Hillary, and Silda were more “pro-marriage” in that they stayed by their husbands. And that just gets us back to how the culture has changed. It’s a fascinating thing. Speaking very broadly as there are exceptions all over the place. It seems like liberal political couples work harder to save their marriage after a sex scandal. Again, that’s just an impression. I haven’t tabulated all the cases. But it certainly seems like conservative voters like it more when wives refuse to tolerate their cheating husbands. Does that make conservatives less pro-marriage? Or does it mean that liberal political couples care about politics above all else? Or do they place less stock in the value of fidelity (it’s just sex, who cares?). It seems to me there are a lot of ways dissect that. For now, suffice it to say the times have changed.

And it’s worth noting that what has changed the most isn’t the supply of moral politicians, but the demand for them. Ambitious, selfish, amoral men have always been attracted to politics. At least in terms of his sex life, John F. Kennedy was a disgusting man who, among other things, pimped out an intern. Other presidents, Republican and Democrat, cheated on their wives, too. Such behavior is not new. But that was all kept from the public eye — by the press, by the establishment, etc – in part because it was understood that if the public found out, the politician’s career would be over. Times have changed and the public doesn’t demand — or demand sufficiently — either the myth or the reality of morality anymore.

I think it’s fair to say that conservatives still care more than liberals about maintaining the old standards. And that creates a real dilemma. In an era of moral lassitude, how much do you insist on moral propriety in politics? Since sin and temptation are bipartisan phenomena, should conservatives be at a constant disadvantage? I don’t think there are easy answers there, or at least I can’t think of what they might be. Asking Republicans to vote for Colbert-Busch in order to punish Mark Sanford strikes me as a hard sell. Why support the party you disagree with politically just to punish a man you agree with politically? Colbert-Busch — whose political hero, of course, was John F. Kennedy – wouldn’t even answer directly whether she would vote for Nancy Pelosi as speaker. On matters of political integrity, it seems to me, Sanford was hardly the clear worse choice.

But one thing I really resent is the tendency of liberals to demand that conservatives stick to standards that liberals reject entirely. If you have no brief against the Clintons, the Weiners, the Spitzers, or the Kennedys please don’t pretend you’re offended by the Sanfords. Indeed, when Democratic politicians get caught in scandals, the response from liberals is invariably, Why can’t you conservatives lighten up? Who are you to judge? Etc. It is only when conservatives are caught in such messes, that liberals walk over to the conservative side, pick up our standards, and beat us up with them. Any talk of lightening-up or forgiveness is immediately denounced.

It’s absolutely true that conservatives need to wrestle with the question of what we should expect from our politicians. But I’m not sure liberals have anything worth listening to on the subject.

re: Mark Sanford wins House seat in S. Carolina(Posted by HNTIGER1980 on 5/8/13 at 10:37 am to Zach)

quote:I'll take a prostitute who defends the constitution over a celibate communist any day

And so will 99% of your party. But they love to tell you how moral and christian and how much better they are than you and blah blah blah . But when it comes down to the voting booth all that BS goes right out the window. I appreciate your honesty Zach, I hope you are as honest in real life.

re: Mark Sanford wins House seat in S. Carolina(Posted by HNTIGER1980 on 5/8/13 at 10:39 am to Eighteen)

quote:Why is this a "republican vs democrat" issue? Both sides have shitty human beings as politicians...no shocking, nothing new.

I think that the liberals / democrats are not as hypocritical on these kind of issues. They know humans are flawed and they don't put people up to some unreasonably high moral standard defined in a book written by goat herders.( the bibble)

re: Mark Sanford wins House seat in S. Carolina(Posted by ShortyRob on 5/8/13 at 10:46 am to HNTIGER1980)

quote:And so will 99% of your party. But they love to tell you how moral and christian and how much better they are than you and blah blah blah . But when it comes down to the voting booth all that BS goes right out the window.

I don't get your point.

One can think a behaviour is a moral failing and still not think it matters in relation to policy.

I don't care what they do that doesn't affect me, I care what they do that DOES. So, as far as I'm concerned, policy positions as actually ACTED upon drive my decisions. Moreover, I do that for another reason. That reason is, you don't know ANY of those people. Point?

Well, the point is, trying to determine the personal behavior and character of a person you don't know who happens to have top notch publicists is silly. For every philanderer caught, you can bet that are 10 "good guys" who are just as bad. I have no idea if ANY politician I've ever voted for is a "good person". All I can know with any level of certainty at all is A)What they say and B)If their voting record matches up with what they say and C)If I like this pattern.

quote:On June 24, 2009, Sanford resigned as chairman of the Republican Governors Association, after he publicly revealed that he had engaged in an affair with María Belén Chapur, an Argentine woman to whom he is now engaged.[4][5] He was later censured by the South Carolina General Assembly following a State Ethics Commission investigation into allegations that he had misused state travel funds to conduct his affair.Sanford is also a real estate developer and a medicaladministration officer in the U.S. Air Force Reserve.[6]

but for whatever reason you people fight the obvious and associate its trend as good, when the decision tree shows slime tendency.

quote:fter graduating, she completed a South Carolina State Ports Authority business development internship, and worked for Associated Maritime Industries Inc, as a liaison between the AMI and the U.S. Federal and State Governments.[17] She then worked as the Regional Director for Sales and Marketing and the Director of Business Development at Orient Overseas Container Line (OOCL), where she was responsible for international maritime relations and South Atlantic and North American sales.[18][19] She left OOCL in 2008, when she was hired to be the Director of Business Development at Clemson University’s Restoration Institute, described by the Charleston Post and Courier as “the school’s corporate matchmaker” for the University’s development projects for wind turbine testing, water studies, and renewable energy.[17][20] Colbert Busch also works as the Director of Sales and Marketing Clemson’s Wind Turbine Drivetrain Testing Facility.[21] Colbert Busch is a founder and former member of the Executive Board of Directors of Charleston Women in International Trade, and former member of the College of Charleston’s Business College Alumni Advisory Board.[22] She’s also served as chairwoman of the 2006 S.C. International Trade Conference, the chairwoman of the Maritime Association Port of Charleston and is board member of the Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce.

probably why conservatives didn't flock to her....too much business and not enough sex,lies, & theft